It's my opinion that, as Apple's fortunes have improved, we've gotten a larger number of people posting here that seem to just want to tell us what fanboys we are and how Apple's products are generally inferior, overpriced and underperforming. I have no idea what compels anyone to spend their days in this behavior, but based on post counts it appears that there really is a nontrivial demographic that gets off on being King of Apple Sucks on Mac Island.

For instance, in the iPhone forum, there are more than few people who's entire oeuvre consists of repeated reminders that the iPhone is actually a terrible, crippled piece of shit that only sells in the numbers it does because Apple sheeple are easily swayed by shiny things.

It's a good problem to have, actually. You'd know that Apple was in deep trouble if no one gave enough of a sh*t about the iPhone to critique it.

Quote:

Some of those might have the germ of an actual argument, but you can't really be surprised if the response ranges from hostile to dismissive.

I think some of the hostility and dismissiveness comes from the perceptions/attitudes of the posters who respond that way. Too many of them tend to mistake honest critiques for attacks or trolling.

That said, there are a few ppl who are out to troll. But I do wish ppl were better about distinguishing between the trolls and the honest critics.

My memory is faulty at times, but weren't you the one who all-but-accused me of being involved in some sort of nefarious Euro-poster anti-Apple cabal based on my use of the word "roughshod" in a post? If not you, someone else did.

For instance, in the iPhone forum, there are more than few people who's entire oeuvre consists of repeated reminders that the iPhone is actually a terrible, crippled piece of shit that only sells in the numbers it does because Apple sheeple are easily swayed by shiny things.

Until they buy one and become so obsessed with it they use it to shove it up their (@#*

My mileage here, both in what I've seen and in what I've directly experienced, definitely varies from that.

Often you can have a thoughtful criticism, and still be attacked for it. When I first started posting here, I was often called a troll. I still get dismissed occasionally for being 'anti-Apple' or some amusing variation thereof on occasion. And I think I've been treated mildly compared to some.

There is definitely some 'groupthink' at AI, but you can fight your way through it by having a tough-enough skin. Doesn't mean that it still doesn't suck, tho'.

...

He's talking about the mods, those terrible people such as myself, who remove posts at the slightest whim, and threaten people every time we get criticized, or the site is criticized.

I think some of the hostility and dismissiveness comes from the perceptions/attitudes of the posters who respond that way. Too many of them tend to mistake honest critiques for attacks or trolling.

That said, there are a few ppl who are out to troll. But I do wish ppl were better about distinguishing between the trolls and the honest critics.

As far as trolling goes, I've found that there are a bunch of people who are trolling. Some of them can get converted by the simple fact of accusing them of it. It's amazing that many trolls don't seem to understand that they are recognized as such, and when they are, they become embarrassed, and attempt to show they aren't. I've seen it happen more than once, which is why I have no problem outing what I think to be one.

Trolls usually have a simple format. Say something that will get people angry. Hint (or say outright) that people who like, or don't like whatever it is, are fanboys. Say nothing in depth. Refuse to directly answer replies that have logical arguments or facts. Repeat with little variance the original statement(s).

When I see that happen, as I did recently, I always assume it's trolling.

My philosophy on Apple over the past few years is this:

Whether Jobs is brilliant, or just lucky, he's made mostly very good decisions. Most other CEO's from other companies in the industry, brilliant or not, haven't.

Apple has mostly made higher quality products, while most competitors haven't.

Apple has mostly made products that people want, where most competitors haven't.

Apple has mostly seen where things are going, where most competitors haven't.

Apple has managed their finances better than most of their competitors.

Apple's marketing has been better than most of the marketing of their competitors.

Apple has screwed up, but less than most of their competitors.

That covers most of it.

There's plenty to like there in Apple, but there's also enough they've done to disagree with and grumble about.

I do all of that.

As Apple is successful, mostly I find things to agree with. But I also find things to disagree with.

At all times I try to remember that Apple is a company that must think about the company first, and that whatever they do, its not because they are some mythical benevolent godfather, but a company that must care about existing, growing, and being profitable, and that everything else follows from that.

That means that there will always be some group that is not happy with something they may have done, but whose desires simply doesn't fall into the company's plans.

It's always interesting to see that some newbie who doesn't know the senior members of the site, is willing to label us as fanboys based on a single discussion over a single issue.

As far as trolling goes, I've found that there are a bunch of people who are trolling. Some of them can get converted by the simple fact of accusing them of it. It's amazing that many trolls don't seem to understand that they are recognized as such, and when they are, they become embarrassed, and attempt to show they aren't. I've seen it happen more than once, which is why I have no problem outing what I think to be one.

As I've said, such ppl exist. But many ppl get accused of trolling who aren't trolls at all.

In fact, I seem to remember butting heads with you quite strongly at our first meeting here. No doubt you thought me a troll then. But I ended up not being one. Food for thought, eh?

In any case, I worry less about the mods and more about the posters when it comes to AI. But mods can certainly affect the posters to an extent.

Or completely, if one wants to go to the HoFo 'lockdown' model, where a sneeze gets you banned. I don't dig that.

Funny thing is, posters at HoFo defend that model to the death, and call you a troll for not liking it.

...

It's a very difficult decision to make.

Over the years, I've been called all sorts of things, including any number of four letter words, or others with the same concept. Never has a mod, to my knowledge, done anything about it, though some people have mailed me privately to ask if they should complain. I've only done so way back, when the statements were so egregious that I had to say something, and that was only to ask to have the person in question watched for a while.

People are funny though. I've responded to some rather stupid and hostile postings, only to have people comment on my response, without making comments on the posts that began it.

I once responded to an insulting post on ARs, and Caesar threatened to ban me for a few days. Seven people came on line to defend my response, and to blame the other poster, but Caesar never acknowledged their defense.

It's all very strange.

The question is just how far it can be allowed to go.

It's easy if someone just blasts out some unacceptable statements about someone, but more often, the tempers rise slowly. Nothing is understood to be amiss until, sometimes, pages later. How does one work with that?

I'd rather see it peter out by itself. As I've been so involved with these things myself here, I don't see it as being a big problem. A warning to calm down seems to be enough most of the time.

As I've said, such ppl exist. But many ppl get accused of trolling who aren't trolls at all.

In fact, I seem to remember butting heads with you quite strongly at our first meeting here. No doubt you thought me a troll then. But I ended up not being one. Food for thought, eh?

...

Butting heads is fine. It's all very boring if we agree on everything. But I never thought you were a troll.

You can usually tell if I do. Firstoff, I will usually ask if the person is trolling, and try to get some more coherent statements out of him. If that doesn't work, then normally, the person IS a troll.

But, as I've said, sometimes you can even get a troll to move away from that.

Butting heads is fine. It's all very boring if we agree on everything. But I never thought you were a troll.

You gave me a very strong impression otherwise.

In any case, notice something? We seem to be talking a great deal of troll witch-hunt here. Also the AI way.

Whether you realize or not Mel, you are of AI on this one. Not sure it's quite so healthy for the community to be worrying so very much about a rather small group of ppl. The obvious trolls always give themselves away, and they don't matter much anyway. "We have met the enemy, and they is dumb."

A more serious issue is AIers fighting amongst themselves over trivialities and banalities, ad nauseum.

Over the years, I've been called all sorts of things, including any number of four letter words, or others with the same concept. Never has a mod, to my knowledge, done anything about it, though some people have mailed me privately to ask if they should complain. I've only done so way back, when the statements were so egregious that I had to say something, and that was only to ask to have the person in question watched for a while.

People are funny though. I've responded to some rather stupid and hostile postings, only to have people comment on my response, without making comments on the posts that began it.

I once responded to an insulting post on ARs, and Caesar threatened to ban me for a few days. Seven people came on line to defend my response, and to blame the other poster, but Caesar never acknowledged their defense.

It's all very strange.

The question is just how far it can be allowed to go.

It's easy if someone just blasts out some unacceptable statements about someone, but more often, the tempers rise slowly. Nothing is understood to be amiss until, sometimes, pages later. How does one work with that?

I'd rather see it peter out by itself. As I've been so involved with these things myself here, I don't see it as being a big problem. A warning to calm down seems to be enough most of the time.

I hear ya. It IS hard. I used to be a mod on the MacNN forums.

I would just say, take it up a notch, be a little bit more activist in intervening in situations before they get nasty, do more to keep things on track. I did so when I was a mod, and it usually turned out for the better.

The one or two times when a bad little boy poster would give me unfair grief over it, he was gang-tackled by the community, essentially. Kind of gratifying to see actually.

As far as trolling goes, I've found that there are a bunch of people who are trolling. Some of them can get converted by the simple fact of accusing them of it. It's amazing that many trolls don't seem to understand that they are recognized as such, and when they are, they become embarrassed, and attempt to show they aren't. I've seen it happen more than once, which is why I have no problem outing what I think to be one.

Trolls usually have a simple format. Say something that will get people angry. Hint (or say outright) that people who like, or don't like whatever it is, are fanboys. Say nothing in depth. Refuse to directly answer replies that have logical arguments or facts. Repeat with little variance the original statement(s).

When I see that happen, as I did recently, I always assume it's trolling.

My philosophy on Apple over the past few years is this:

Whether Jobs is brilliant, or just lucky, he's made mostly very good decisions. Most other CEO's from other companies in the industry, brilliant or not, haven't.

Apple has mostly made higher quality products, while most competitors haven't.

Apple has mostly made products that people want, where most competitors haven't.

Apple has mostly seen where things are going, where most competitors haven't.

Apple has managed their finances better than most of their competitors.

Apple's marketing has been better than most of the marketing of their competitors.

Apple has screwed up, but less than most of their competitors.

That covers most of it.

There's plenty to like there in Apple, but there's also enough they've done to disagree with and grumble about.

I do all of that.

As Apple is successful, mostly I find things to agree with. But I also find things to disagree with.

At all times I try to remember that Apple is a company that must think about the company first, and that whatever they do, its not because they are some mythical benevolent godfather, but a company that must care about existing, growing, and being profitable, and that everything else follows from that.

That means that there will always be some group that is not happy with something they may have done, but whose desires simply doesn't fall into the company's plans.

It's always interesting to see that some newbie who doesn't know the senior members of the site, is willing to label us as fanboys based on a single discussion over a single issue.

I have said the exact same thing as you on other forums and I was banned permanently by a bunch of mac haters.

I haven't said anything to rile people up. All I have posted is backed up by FACTS from reputable websites reporting on the news. I also tried to keep the emotion out of it... no such luck. I was called koolaid drinker, steve job's pet, apple fanboi, steve jobs himself, etc, in short I was flamed to a crisp.

People who choose to believe that windows vista is not a pile of crap will continue to do so.

People who do not understand that mac software is not about the looks, it about doing things more efficiently, will continue to believe the former.

People who thing macs are overpriced will not budge, even though I have repeatedly demonstrated that the much larger productivity that comes from using a mac will pay itself in no time.

People just don't understand that substituting their computers will macs, cable tv with apple tv, clunky backup systems with time machine, and phones with the iphone, will improve their quality of life 10-fold by doing more with less time so you can spend more time with family and friends, you know stuff that matters, instead of installing 100 third party software to do what a mac does out of the box or cleaning the latest trojan attack.

These are sad times. To me it is like during medieval times when the vast majority of Europe still believed that the word of god was all there was. Science existed but it was confined to a tiny minority who had brilliant and corageous minds. Time will come when humanity will see the light and everybody will convert from darkness (Windows) to the light (Macs).

In addition, there's an even more specific segment that seems to be really popular: touchscreen smartphones. And with the G1 not being much to talk about while the BlackBerry Storm continues to take on a lot of bad press, Apple is in a terribly good position.

It is not just touchscreen. Palm Treo line has touch screens on most of their models for years, and many Pocket PC phones have touch screen as well. It is not even about features - people ARE complaining about missing ones. It is design of software and hardware, and their integration... plus, of course, the image factor and brand loyalty.

Apple is in the sweet spot right now. If they make, say, bottle opener, I bet huge majority of Mac/iPod/iPhone users will get one... just because it is Apple. Other brands simply don't command such loyalty, and that is - from my point of view - the biggest achievement Jobs managed to pull out.

Apple is in the sweet spot right now. If they make, say, bottle opener, I bet huge majority of Mac/iPod/iPhone users will get one... just because it is Apple. Other brands simply don't command such loyalty, and that is - from my point of view - the biggest achievement Jobs managed to pull out.

The interesting thing is that many people who don't own an Apple product will buy it.

It is not just touchscreen. Palm Treo line has touch screens on most of their models for years, and many Pocket PC phones have touch screen as well. It is not even about features - people ARE complaining about missing ones. It is design of software and hardware, and their integration... plus, of course, the image factor and brand loyalty.

Apple is in the sweet spot right now. If they make, say, bottle opener, I bet huge majority of Mac/iPod/iPhone users will get one... just because it is Apple. Other brands simply don't command such loyalty, and that is - from my point of view - the biggest achievement Jobs managed to pull out.

That's a good point. I should have said capacitance, MultiTouch touchscreen smartphone segment. On that level, Apple stands alone (as far as I know).

Now you talk about a "perfect device" when no one means that at all, which you very well know.

But you want to up the ante so to speak.

If you can't get your way, then you change it.

Not good debating technique.

That's why it really does look as though you are trolling.

You can think that all you want, you gave me a definition that you were happy with, I could still prove that the device doesn't meet that definition, and you still will not accept it. If you want to continue living in a fantasy world, you are more than welcome.

I haven't mentioned a "perfect device" as you put it, you are the one that brings that continues to bring that up.

Bluetooth on my iPhone is serving me very well within the limitations of the technology (referring to BT tech in general, not the iPhone's implementation of it).

- BT sucks battery power too much for my taste
- I'd never use a2dp because the sound quality is insufficient for me, I'll use ear buds
- I don't use it for file transfer, I connect via WiFi and USB for that
- It connects well with my Motorola headset

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfanning

Oh? You mean you don't have bluetooth support comparable to the most advanced models in that category? Oh, that would mean the iPhone isn't full featured wouldn't it???

No . . . it means that the iPhone is full featured because it provides for all the functions with appropriate technology. Good stereo sound - ear buds. File transfer - WiFi or USB. BT for handsfree with my BT headset.

Don't forget that not there are different touchscreen technologies. I think Apple is the sole owner and the only one using capacitance touchscreens.

BIN-F..-GO!!

Exactly and because most people dont understand technology it is so hard to get this point across.

Repeat after me: Apple is the ONLY manufacturer of capacitance touchscreens.

Why this is important: because it is much more precise than any other touchscreen. It allows you to type correctly in a 3.5 inch screen while all other phones have trouble, just to give you ONE example.

It it the same with everything else: people go to COSTCO and buy descent $15 wine bottles and think: well why pay $30? Well there is a difference, believe me. Same thing with cars: A BMW 335i and a Nissan 350z both have 4 wheels and 300 horsepower, but one costs $20k more than the other, why? The 350z is a descent car, but the 335i is just sublime.

In short: people are fixated by features when they should be fixated by the implementation.

You can think that all you want, you gave me a definition that you were happy with, I could still prove that the device doesn't meet that definition, and you still will not accept it. If you want to continue living in a fantasy world, you are more than welcome.

I haven't mentioned a "perfect device" as you put it, you are the one that brings that continues to bring that up.

There was about the same definition given by a well established magazine shown here. A definition, that I'm sure if you really wanted to, would be seen to be repeated many other places.

Also, you don't remember what you post a short time after you post it.

You are now saying that: "I haven't mentioned a "perfect device" as you put it, you are the one that brings that continues to bring that up."

Well, this is where I have the right to demand that you go back over every one of my posts to the thread, and find one single instance where I said "perfect device".

Despite your denial, YOU are the one who mentioned "perfect device" in YOUR post just before your one I'm responding to now! You are the one expecting a device that meets your odd description to be perfect.

Here is the quote from YOU:

"You are fine to live in your little dream world of your perfect device, I don't mind, if you want to think you have bluetooth device, that is fine by me."

That is where the first mention of a "perfect device" came up.

Don't forget your own poor attempt at defining what full featured means: Every feature that is possible, which, is, of course, impossible.
You are looking for the prefect device, not me. That's pretty clear.

I do wonder sometimes why Apple has so few of the Bluetooth profiles/so little BT functionality active on the iPhone. Last I checked anyway.

I mean, some of us are going to say, "Aww, BT sucks anyway, I don't need it" yadda yadda yadda, but that still doesn't answer the Q.

Just wondering. After all, a lot of ppl used to slam Verizon for having most of the BT profiles disabled in nearly all of their handsets, until VZW finally started to ease up on that recently. \

...

It answers the question very nicely.

Apple rarely likes to make a function available that works poorly.

Most BT functions work poorly, or are bettered by other functions.

Why offer something that is more trouble than it's worth?

Can you name one single function of BT that Apple left out, that does better than other functions that ARE built into the iPhone/iTouch?

jfanning seems to think that not adding badly thought out functionality that barely works at all is a bad thing in itself. I disagree.

If BT ever does some of these things properly, and as well, or better than what's available now, then it's likely Apple will include them. After all, it's mostly software. It's not like building another port into the device as with FW.

There was about the same definition given by a well established magazine shown here. A definition, that I'm sure if you really wanted to, would be seen to be repeated many other places.

Also, you don't remember what you post a short time after you post it.

You are now saying that: "I haven't mentioned a "perfect device" as you put it, you are the one that brings that continues to bring that up."

Well, this is where I have the right to demand that you go back over every one of my posts to the thread, and find one single instance where I said "perfect device".

Despite your denial, YOU are the one who mentioned "perfect device" in YOUR post just before your one I'm responding to now! You are the one expecting a device that meets your odd description to be perfect.

Here is the quote from YOU:

"You are fine to live in your little dream world of your perfect device, I don't mind, if you want to think you have bluetooth device, that is fine by me."

That is where the first mention of a "perfect device" came up.

Don't forget your own poor attempt at defining what full featured means: Every feature that is possible, which, is, of course, impossible.
You are looking for the prefect device, not me. That's pretty clear.

I hope you find one.

In the end, isn't this quibbling more than a little silly?

I couldn't care less about the exact definition of a "perfect device." This argument is so AI, and not in a good way.

Can you name one single function of BT that Apple left out, that does better than other functions that ARE built into the iPhone/iTouch?

jfanning seems to think that not adding badly thought out functionality that barely works at all is a bad thing in itself. I disagree.

If BT ever does some of these things properly, and as well, or better than what's available now, then it's likely Apple will include them. After all, it's mostly software. It's not like building another port into the device as with FW.

Not sure I really buy into the "don't include poor or hard-to-use functionality" argument. After all, that's been used as an argument as to why there's no MMS on the iPhone, when in actuality MMS is very easy, useful, and quite popular. I think that argument has sort of become a generic 'get out of jail free' card for Apple when they omit features or functionality. Not that I think that every feature must be included, or is particularly useful... just that I think Apple does go too far sometimes in its features/functionality omissions. Steve's a bit too aggressive in his love of minimalism at times, this is true of most ideological types.

In any case, here's a list of BT profiles. I'll leave it to others to debate whether the inclusion of any of these (beyond the two already supported, Headset and Hands-Free) would be a good idea on the iPhone:

I have never argued with anyone who simply did not like the iPhone or anyone who felt it did not meet their needs. Recently I suggested to a friend he get the BlackBerry Bold over the iPhone based on what he needed.

When people criticize the iPhone and complain about Apple's choices. I never deny them their right to criticize or complain. I challenge them to provide evidence outside of their personal opinion. A supporting example of how Apple and the iPhone would benefit from what they feel is missing or Apple doing wrong.

Few people provide this supporting evidence. Instead of debating on the facts more often than not they resort to fanboy accusations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TBaggins

I think some of the hostility and dismissiveness comes from the perceptions/attitudes of the posters who respond that way. Too many of them tend to mistake honest critiques for attacks or trolling. ...

When people criticize the iPhone and complain about Apple's choices. I never deny them their right to criticize or complain. I challenge them to provide evidence outside of their personal opinion. A supporting example of how Apple and the iPhone would benefit from what they feel is missing or Apple doing wrong.

Few people provide this supporting evidence. Instead of debating on the facts more often than not they resort to fanboy accusations.

Sure, T. The prob is, ppl can provide you with tons of evidence outside of their personal opinion, and you still tend to deny it all, in favor of some sort of 'Apple is always' right ethic that you seem to have. I've at times said that arguing with you is like debating a rock, and while I'm joking a tiny bit, there's some truth to that.

I contrast this with someone like Mel, who thinks Apple is usually right, but who will candidly admit things like, "Yeah, Steve probably did take away Firewire too early."

You're not quite as open-minded as you seem to think, T. That said, I do respect your intelligence and the interest you take in the various discussions. I just don't think you're as interesting to debate as many others here, because I already know what you're going to say before you say it, pretty much. It's like debating a conservative over tax policy.

Sure, T. The prob is, ppl can provide you with tons of evidence outside of their personal opinion, and you still tend to deny it all, in favor of some sort of 'Apple is always' right ethic that you seem to have. I've at times said that arguing with you is like debating a rock, and while I'm joking a tiny bit, there's some truth to that.

Their are some critical flaws in the evidence provided as I said above. People show other phones that do things they want the iPhone to do. The crucial part is the evidence that Apple would improve sales if the iPhone were more like these other phones. Their is never any evidence of that. Mostly because no other smartphone by itself is selling better than the iPhone.

I am not saying that Apple does everything right. I'm looking at the fact that the iPhone is one of the best selling smartphones in the world. From this evidence Apple has made some pretty good choices. I am saying their is little to no evidence that Apple should follow its competitors choices. Because none of them have a singular phone model that sells as well.

Quote:

I contrast this with someone like Mel, who thinks Apple is usually right, but who will candidly admit things like, "Yeah, Steve probably did take away Firewire too early."

Early in the firewire debate. I said I wished Apple would hold on to firewire until USB 3 is available, but I can understand why they are letting it go.

In fact I said I would prefer firewire had beat USB. But unfortunately that is not the reality.

Quote:

You're not quite as open-minded as you seem to think, T. That said, I do respect your intelligence and the interest you take in the various discussions. I just don't think you're as interesting to debate as many others here, because I already know what you're going to say before you say it, pretty much. It's like debating a conservative over tax policy.
...

I don't think you were around when I criticized Apple for the way it was rejecting apps from the app store and its uneven approval of apps. I felt that Apple was risking a developer backlash.

Mel and Solpism disagreed with me. So far their has been no developer backlash and the submission of apps has gone on uninterrupted. I'm sure presenting apps in iPhone commercials go a long way to making developers happy.

I couldn't care less about the exact definition of a "perfect device." This argument is so AI, and not in a good way.

You both could be discussing matters of much greater import.

...

I'm not the one who brought it up. I'm saying that talking about a perfect device, a term he brought up, is silly, because there will never be such a thing.

What he's saying, apparently, is that unless some device has every feature that is even remotely possible, it isn't a perfect device, and it must be, in order to qualify it's being described as "full featured".

I don't know of anyone else who brought up anything similar here, in this discussion about "full featured" devices. Just him.

Not sure I really buy into the "don't include poor or hard-to-use functionality" argument. After all, that's been used as an argument as to why there's no MMS on the iPhone, when in actuality MMS is very easy, useful, and quite popular. I think that argument has sort of become a generic 'get out of jail free' card for Apple when they omit features or functionality. Not that I think that every feature must be included, or is particularly useful... just that I think Apple does go too far sometimes in its features/functionality omissions. Steve's a bit too aggressive in his love of minimalism at times, this is true of most ideological types.

In any case, here's a list of BT profiles. I'll leave it to others to debate whether the inclusion of any of these (beyond the two already supported, Headset and Hands-Free) would be a good idea on the iPhone:

Certainly, at this time, I can't see the virtue in most of those for an iPhone, do you?

Some of them don't even work properly, and most of the others are done better in other ways.

Often, when some "standard" come out, they try to put the old kitchen sink in to see whether that give it a better chance of surviving, hoping that someone, somewhere, will find a use for at least one of the uses, and that if enough do it, it will "make it".

But that doesn't mean that it's a good idea.

The biggest thing here seems to be the idea of stereo headphones, I wish it were possible, in a reliable way. But it isn'tyet. Possibly, in the next incarnation of BT, they will fix the problems, but until then, it's not much of a feature, as it's broken.

Certainly, at this time, I can't see the virtue in most of those for an iPhone, do you?

Some of them don't even work properly, and most of the others are done better in other ways.

Often, when some "standard" come out, they try to put the old kitchen sink in to see whether that give it a better chance of surviving, hoping that someone, somewhere, will find a use for at least one of the uses, and that if enough do it, it will "make it".

But that doesn't mean that it's a good idea.

The biggest thing here seems to be the idea of stereo headphones, I wish it were possible, in a reliable way. But it isn'tyet. Possibly, in the next incarnation of BT, they will fix the problems, but until then, it's not much of a feature, as it's broken.

Personally the way I used bluetooth was something I had to weigh up carefully before purchasing an iPhone.

A2DP was only part of that decision, the other bluetooth features I mainly used or tried to use were:-

Voice dialing:- I have never used a phone that could get this right, no matter how clearly I tried to enunciate it would never work properly, (e.g. I'd try to call Sam it would call Shane.)

File transfer this was something I used on a regular basis, the ability to quickly share contact information or a photo with another handset, downside when you do it in a busy area and your phone retrieves a list of in-range devices it could take a long time for it to resolve device names, (especially if some of them moved out of range) until you found the one you wanted
now I use email or Facebook to share photo's (the ability to attach more than one at a time would be nice) and iBeam for contacts.

Tethering (using as a modem attached to a PC via bluetooth) I used to use this a lot when I didn't have a phoneline, with Windows once it was installed and set up it worked well, with Linux it was a nightmare, since moving and getting a phoneline and ADSL I no longer need it.

One of the things I have found is since getting an iPhone I hardly ever use a PC for email, it's only when I want to send attachments (aside from photo's) that I fire up my email client.

Personally the way I used bluetooth was something I had to weigh up carefully before purchasing an iPhone.

A2DP was only part of that decision, the other bluetooth features I mainly used or tried to use were:-

Voice dialing:- I have never used a phone that could get this right, no matter how clearly I tried to enunciate it would never work properly, (e.g. I'd try to call Sam it would call Shane.)

File transfer this was something I used on a regular basis, the ability to quickly share contact information or a photo with another handset, downside when you do it in a busy area and your phone retrieves a list of in-range devices it could take a long time for it to resolve device names, (especially if some of them moved out of range) until you found the one you wanted
now I use email or Facebook to share photo's (the ability to attach more than one at a time would be nice) and iBeam for contacts.

Tethering (using as a modem attached to a PC via bluetooth) I used to use this a lot when I didn't have a phoneline, with Windows once it was installed and set up it worked well, with Linux it was a nightmare, since moving and getting a phoneline and ADSL I no longer need it.

One of the things I have found is since getting an iPhone I hardly ever use a PC for email, it's only when I want to send attachments (aside from photo's) that I fire up my email client.